«Sustainability means more»
Putin's war of aggression has put the world in a dire position. We see people in Ukraine dying today and we have to fear that a global food crisis will soon kill people in Africa, for example. Where the situation is not life-threatening, it is nevertheless bitter: Rising prices are forcing people into poverty in many places. This first threatens social peace and then destabilizes other parts of the world.
Tuesday, April 5, 2022
The war in Ukraine will therefore change what manufacturers, traders and consumers understand by sustainability. The situation that Putin has put the world in has made Western society aware this it has increasingly been repressing immediate dangers. Anyone whose energy policy has brought about existential dependency on a long-standing unscrupulous autocrat did nothing for sustainability except in the eyes of a short-sighted public. This is also the case with food issues: Anyone who still calls for agricultural set-aside during Putin's war, for example, is clearly living in an extremely small bubble. Ukraine and Russia are largely out of order as wheat suppliers to a significant part of the world. Efficient agriculture in fertile countries such as Germany is now essential for people living in regions where much less growth is taking place.
The idea of ensuring good living conditions for humanity in the long term is important. However, what many companies and consumers so far understand by sustainability is hardly suitable for this purpose. Sustainability is often just a buzzword for environmental protection, especially in the consumer goods sector. The war in Ukraine shows that a world worth living in is only possible if sustainability is also seen as a social goal. Honesty is needed for this. We must admit that solutions that are conceived unilaterally and only for the better-off sometimes soothe the conscience at the expense of others. We need to find a balanced approach – also because only economically successful companies maintain good jobs, pay taxes and develop innovations for a future worth living. All of this is needed to preserve the defense capability and radiance of the Western world – that is, freedom and peace. Without peace and prosperity, the environment and the climate are also lost. Only a few autocrats have so far emerged as environmentalists. Russian tank factories are not known for climate efforts.
Consumers now feel that what seems sustainable is often not sustainable. At a time when global prices are rising and jobs are becoming insecure in many places, interest in the social dimension of sustainability is increasing: It is increasingly about making affordable goods available and securing people an adequate income. This offers consumer goods companies the opportunity to see sustainability less as an advertising buzzword – and to anchor responsible behavior more deeply.
Such a new vision can be demonstrated in the price negotiations, which, in view of the unprecedented cost increases, are often just starting again from the beginning. It is important to protect the interests of companies, consumers and employees in the German consumer goods industry.
Consumers now feel that what seems sustainable is often not sustainable.
Hendrik Varnholt works as a Journalist at "Lebensmittel Zeitung". This article was first published in "Lebensmittel Zeitung" on 18 March 2022.
Related articles
PFAS regulation in Switzerland: Not faster, but better
Some people also call PFAS ‘forever chemicals’. Their use must be regulated as wisely as possible. To do this, the federal government first needs to do precise groundwork, according to Stefan Brupbacher, Urs Furrer and Stephan Mumenthaler.
When surveys create fear
Surveys on technologies such as genetic engineering often focus on risks and spread panic instead of promoting a balanced discussion of the pros and cons. A striking example is the environmental indicator of the Federal Statistical Office. Social scientist Angela Bearth is highly critical of the survey. The public debate on new technologies such as genetic engineering or 5G mobile communications is often conducted emotionally. Current surveys encourage this by stirring up fears instead of enabling an objective consideration of risks and benefits. One example of this is the environmental indicator, a survey conducted by the Federal Statistical Office (FSO) on the subject of hazards. Using simplistic questions, it generates distorted perceptions. In an article on the progressive Agrarwende.ch platform of the Eco-Progressive Network association, social scientist Angela Bearth addresses the issue.
False study on crop protection poisoning influences political decisions
In recent years, the alarming news has been making the rounds that 385 million people suffer from crop protection poisoning every year. The claim comes from a study by critics of pesticides. It has been taken up and spread by numerous media and government institutions. The problem: the number is wrong. The study does not even allow for the conclusion, which is why the scientific publisher in question has since withdrawn the study. Nevertheless, it has influenced politics and continues to be cited frequently.
The ideological misuse of «scientific» studies
Science serves as a basis for political decisions, including in nature conservation. However, a key question is: how trustworthy are the underlying studies and data? An article in the «NZZ am Sonntag» and the explanations provided by Quarks offer revealing perspectives on the quality of scientific studies and the possible misuse of figures.